When enthusiasm and commitment take root within a project, that project comes to life.

Robin Sieger 
British business executive.
Natural Born Winners

Hofstadter's Law: It always takes longer than you expect, even when you take into account
Hofstadter's Law.
Douglas R. Hofstadter (1945 - )
U.S. physicist and writer.
Gödel, Escher, Bach: An Eternal Golden Braid
Immortality is to labor at an eternal task.
Ernest Renan (1823 - 1892)
French philosopher, philologist and historian.
L'Avenir de la science: Pensées de 1848

In America, projects have a beginning, a middle, and an end. In Japan, projects have direction, so
that what you're pushing for is heading further and further out.
John Sculley (1939 - )
U.S. business executive.
Odyssey: from Pepsi to Apple

If you cite an R&D project in the chairman's letter in the annual report, the project will enjoy
perpetual funding whether or not it even sees the light of day in the marketplace.
Richard J. Mahoney 
U.S. business executive.
Speech

A thing which cannot be accomplished should never be undertaken.

Anonymous 
African (Yoruba) proverb.

People forget how fast you did a job—but they remember how well you did it.
Howard W. Newton (1903 - 1951)
U.S. advertising executive.

1973: Education
Archives consist of articles that originally appeared in Collier's Year Book (for events of 1997 and earlier) or as monthly updates
in Encarta Yearbook (for events of 1998 and later). Because they were published shortly after events occurred, they reflect the
information available at that time. Cross references refer to Archive articles of the same year.

1973: Education
Entering a new era of stabilizing enrollments and reduced fiscal support, education leaders in the
United States concentrated on the search for new ways of cutting costs without impairing quality.
After many years of steady expansion and growth, the schools and colleges faced an extended
period of retrenchment. The elementary schools registered the third consecutive year of actual
decline in enrollment, reflecting the reduced birthrate; secondary and higher education will face a
similar enrollment drop within a few years. Looking ahead, Clark Kerr, chairman of the Carnegie
Commission on Higher Education, warned that the 1980's might be a time of 'zero hiring' of
faculty members on the country's campuses.

Fiscal crisis.

The public schools opened the 1973-1974 school year under pressure of financial and other
shortages. Fuel shortages led to the curtailment of field trips in some districts, and many school
officials warned of curtailed heating in the winter months. The high cost of food led to the
termination of school lunch programs in many states, leaving some 800,000 children without
such benefits at the start of the academic year. It was estimated that between $160 million and
$200 million in additional federal funds would be needed, beyond the existing $1 billion subsidy,
to keep up with the rise in food prices.
During the 1972 fiscal year, voters approved of less than half of all school bond issues, even
though the average size of issues dropped from $2.7 million to $2.5 million.
Colleges and universities were slashing expenditures in order to fight budget deficits and halt the
rise in tuition. Faculty members were being ordered to reduce trips to meetings and conferences.
At many institutions, maintenance staffs were cut; in addition, across-the-board freezes on hiring
were instituted in some cases. The Carnegie Commission reported that such cost-control
measures have allowed the majority of institutions to avoid the serious fiscal crises which its
earlier study had predicted. The commission, in a follow-up to its 1971 study 'The New
Depression in Higher Education,' found that the institutions' response had been 'phenomenal.'
The average annual increase in costs per student was seen to have dropped from nearly 4 percent
above the rate of inflation in 1966-1970 to 0.5 percent in 1969-1973. As a result of greater
economy, fees for food, housing, and other auxiliary services were not substantially increased on
most campuses.

College admissions.

Except in the relatively few top-prestige private institutions, there were more college places than
applicants this year. Initial estimates indicate that the excess of about half a million places
registered in the 1972-1973 academic year may have grown to at least 600,000. The Western
Interstate Commission for Higher Education reported that the region's 13 states had 130,000
unfilled openings at a total of 206 institutions. The reason for the oversupply of places was not a
drop in enrollment but an overexpansion of the campuses. Buildings planned and begun during
the boom years of the 1960's are still being produced. At the same time, increasing numbers of
students are postponing their entry into higher education in favor of some nonacademic work and
on-the-job training. To counter the trend of declining freshman enrollments, a fall 1973 Carnegie
Commission report, 'Continuity and Discontinuity: Higher Education and the Schools,' urged
four-year colleges to admit more adults, transfers, veterans, and tenth-grade and 11th-grade high
school students.
Statistical survey.

Enrollment and degrees.

At the beginning of the 1973-1974 academic year, total enrollment in all United States
educational institutions, public and private, stood at 58.9 million, compared with 59.3 million in
1972-1973. The enrollment decline was the first in 29 years. Even though secondary and higher
education continued to register small gains, the reduction in elementary school enrollment had
become sufficiently marked to reverse the trend of overall growth.
The elementary grades (kindergarten through grade 8) accounted for 35.1 million students (a
decline of more than 600,000, or 1.7 percent), of whom 31.3 million were enrolled in public
schools. Of the 3.6 million students attending nonpublic institutions, by far the greatest number
were in Roman Catholic schools, but their total also declined, by about 400,000, or nearly 10
percent.
In public high schools (grades 9-12) enrollment was estimated at 15.5 million, an increase of
about 200,000. Of the remaining 1.3 million high school students, slightly fewer than 1 million
attended Roman Catholic schools, approximately the same number as in 1972-1973.
Fall 1973 enrollment in institutions of higher learning was estimated at 8.3 million, up by
100,000. Public institutions, with 6.2 million students, accounted for all of the enrollment
growth. Undergraduates made up 7.4 million of the total.
The high school graduating class of 1974 is expected to exceed 3.1 million, vying with the class
of 1973 as the largest in U.S. history. Projected for 1973-1974 are the following numbers of
earned college and university degrees conferred: bachelor's degrees, 958,000; first professional
degrees, 61,000; master's degrees, 263,000; doctorates, 38,000.
According to estimates by the U.S. Office of Education, more than three-fourths of students aged
16 and 17 will graduate from high school; of these, 48 percent will enter a college or university,
and one-fourth will earn bachelor's degrees; 8 percent will earn master's degrees, and 1.5 percent
will receive doctorates.
The National Science Foundation's 1973 survey indicated that graduate science enrollment
declined by 2 percent between 1971 and 1972. All areas, except the life and social sciences,
reflected the decline. The number of federally subsidized full-time graduate students in science
declined by 10 percent.

Expenditures.

Total expenditures in 1973-1974 for education at all levels, public and private, were estimated at
$96.7 billion, compared with $89.4 billion in 1972-1973. About $86.2 billion of the total is
expected to be used for operating expenditures, and capital construction will account for $10.5
billion. The nonpublic sector's part of the total expenditure will be $17 billion. Of the total 1973-
1974 cost, $61.5 billion will go for elementary and secondary education. The total expenditure
for education is expected to approach 8 percent of the gross national product.
The per-pupil expenditure in the public schools in 1972-1973 (based on average daily
attendance) stood at a national average of $1,034, a 6.6 percent increase over the previous year.

School finance reform.

The national average figure, although a general indicator of the level of financial support for
education, does not reflect the amount of money actually spent for any given child's schooling,
an amount that can vary greatly depending on the school district in which he or she lives. This
situation has been criticized in recent years by some educators, lawyers, and residents of low-
wealth districts. However, the movement to reform the financing of public education in the
United States received a major setback this year when the Supreme Court ruled on March 21 that
the large discrepancies in per-pupil spending among school districts did not violate the U.S.
Constitution. An opposite decision would have required major changes in the tax laws and state-
aid distribution formulas of every state except Hawaii.
Advocates of school finance reform had contended that discrepancies in per-pupil spending, the
result of local differences in property values, illegally denied some children equal educational
opportunity merely because they lived in property-poor school districts; the local property tax is
the primary source of funds for public schools in the United States.
Although the Supreme Court said the right to an education was not guaranteed in the federal
Constitution, many state constitutions do have such provisions, and the struggle for school
finance reform was continuing at the state level. For example, just two weeks after the Supreme
Court's ruling, New Jersey's highest court ordered the legislature to devise a plan to equalize the
amount of money spent on each New Jersey child's schooling.

Teachers.

The National Education Association reported that U.S. elementary and secondary schools now
employ 2.1 million teachers, an increase of about 14,000 over the previous year. College and
university faculties are estimated at about 660,000.
There continues to be a large surplus of teachers in virtually all categories and on all levels. For
the 1973-1974 academic year, the NEA reported a supply of 234,550 beginning teachers,
compared with a demand of 111,300, that is, a surplus of 123,250. However, with enrollment in
teacher training institutions declining, it is projected that the surplus of beginning teachers will
have declined to below 50,000 by 1976.
Nationwide, average teachers' salaries stood at $10,643 for all levels of instructional staffs and at
$9,823 for elementary school teachers, an approximate gain of 4.2 percent over the previous
year. Slightly more than 16 percent of all classroom teachers received less than $7,500
(compared with nearly 90 percent in that category ten years ago), and 10.5 percent received
$13,500 or more (a salary level reached for the first time in 1970). Mississippi continued to pay
the lowest salaries, with an average of $6,924; Alaska paid the highest, an average of $14,491.
New York was the only other state paying average salaries above $12,000.

Strikes.

At the beginning of the 1973-1974 school year, it was estimated that 800,000 pupils were kept
from attending classes by teacher strikes. Michigan had the largest number of stoppages, with
teachers on the picket lines in 32 districts, including Detroit. However, the total number of
strikes was well below that of previous years, and the general mood appeared more harmonious.

Mergers.
The overriding issue at the annual conventions of the two major teacher organizations, the
National Education Association (1.4 million members) and the American Federation of Teachers
(375,000 members), was a potential merger of the two groups. The pressure toward such teacher
unity was intensified by the merger of the United Federation of Teachers, the AFT's New York
City local, with the New York State Teachers Association, an NEA affiliate, to form the United
Teachers of New York.
The major stumbling block in the way of a merger was the fact that the AFT is an affiliate of the
AFL—CIO. Many old-line NEA members still consider the labor union pattern of organization
in conflict with the NEA's tradition as a professional group, even though the actual differences
between the two organizations have steadily narrowed over the years. For example, the NEA,
which used to oppose strikes, is now responsible for as many work stoppages as the union. In
addition, the NEA's new executive secretary, Terry Herndon, a former Michigan classroom
teacher, is pressing for a merger, and both the union and the NEA voted to initiate merger talks
during the 1973-1974 school year.

College faculties.

The American Association of University Professors reported that faculty salaries outpaced the
cost of living in 1972, reversing a two-year slide. Salaries and fringe benefits increased by 5
percent during 1972. At 47 institutions, faculty salaries were reported in excess of $20,000.
The American Council on Education reported that the percentage of faculty members holding
tenured positions rose to 64.7 percent in 1972-1973 from 46.7 percent in 1968-1969. During the
same period, the proportion of black and women faculty members increased only minimally,
from 2.2 percent to 2.9 percent and from 19.1 percent to 20 percent, respectively. A total of 39.7
percent of the male faculty members and 19.9 percent of the female faculty reported they had
doctoral degrees.

Civil rights.

The controversy over busing students for the purpose of school desegregation appeared to
subside. In Pontiac, Mich., where school buses were burned two years earlier, the September
1973 school opening took place without hostile incidents. The elementary schools of Alexandria,
Va., initiated a major busing program in an atmosphere of peace.
Two U.S. Supreme Court decisions on busing, involving Denver, Colo., and Richmond, Va.,
reaffirmed that busing could be implemented only to remedy de jure segregation—that is,
segregation intentionally fostered by government action—and that de facto segregation was
beyond the purview of federal courts. The Denver case was returned to a district court in order to
determine whether de jure segregation had, in fact, occurred. In the Richmond case, the first to
reach the Supreme Court involving city-suburban busing, it was held that suburban school
systems could not be held responsible for segregation in Richmond. (No significant legal
precedents were established, however, because the case was decided by a tie vote.) In a similar
case, likely to reach the Supreme Court, a federal judge did order busing between Detroit and its
suburbs. (See CIVIL LIBERTIES AND CIVIL RIGHTS and UNITED STATES: Supreme
Court.)
A study by the United States Commission on Civil Rights found that local school desegregation,
which had been reviewed in ten communities, had contributed to the improvement of education,
largely because it caused school officials to review their educational programs and become
aware of inadequacies. Although most parents interviewed were satisfied with desegregation as it
affected their own children, many of the same respondents had opposed busing in local and state
referendums.
The NEA reported that in the South racial discrimination in the dismissal or demotion of black
teachers and black principals continued to pose serious problems.

Black colleges.

According to the U.S. Office of Education, federal aid to predominantly black colleges and
universities increased 124 percent between 1969 and 1972. The increase, from $108 to $242
million, assisted 114 institutions, most of them located in the South, with an enrollment of
246,219 students, approximately one-third of the country's black undergraduates.

Women.

The National Association of State Universities and Land-Grant Colleges reported that women are
making small, but significant, inroads into the administrative operations of state and land-grant
universities. In the 1972-1973 academic year, 864 women were reported to be holding major
administrative posts. However, women at the top ranks continued to be rare. Only three women
were reported to be the presidents of public institutions—at Hunter College of the City
University of New York; the University of Texas system Nursing School; and the Regional
Campus Administration, Indiana University.
The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education found that in the United States, more women
graduate from high schools than men and that women receive better grades in college; however,
as academic personnel, women do not come close to parity with men in rank and salary. The
report, 'Opportunities for Women in Higher Education,' showed that women faculty members, on
the average, earn $1,500 to $2,000 less a year than do men in comparable positions.

Catholic schools.

An estimated 300 Roman Catholic parochial schools terminated operations in 1973, largely in
response to rising costs and declining enrollments. One of the reasons for the schools' budget
crisis is the fact that they have had to rely increasingly on lay teachers, who received higher
salaries than were formerly paid to priests and nuns. In 1971, lay teachers for the first time
outnumbered religious teachers, and by 1973 the lay faculty constituted 55 percent of the total.
Enrollment in the country's more than 10,000 Roman Catholic parochial schools has dropped
from a peak of 5.5 million in 1965 to 3.8 million in 1973.
The country's parochial school educators had been encouraged by presidential promises of
financial aid, spelled out during the 1972 election campaign. But no federal legislation has been
forthcoming, and in June 1973 the Supreme Court invalidated the parochial school aid statutes of
New York and Pennsylvania.

Federal aid.
Aid to education administered by the Office of Education amounted to $5.6 billion in 1973,
compared with $3.7 billion five years earlier. During the same period, aid to elementary and
secondary education alone rose from slightly more than $2 billion to over $3 billion, and the
contribution to higher education rose from $1 billion to $1.8 billion. Critics of administration
policy, however, have complained that much of the increase has been eroded by inflation. Only
about 7 percent of the total expenditures on elementary and secondary schooling is paid for by
the federal government.

Year-round school.

In 1973 the number of pupils studying during an extended school year reached 300,000 in 31
states. Most of the new programs involved a staggered-quarter system, in which the schools are
open year-round and three-fourths of the students are in school and one-fourth are on vacation
during each three-month period. In 1971, California had 600 students attending one year-round
school; in 1973 there were 60,000 students in 31 such schools.
A similar trend has been reported in higher education. Pressed by rising costs, a small but
growing number of colleges inaugurated a 12-month use of the campus. Pioneered by Beloit
College (in Wisconsin), the University of Pittsburgh, and Kalamazoo College (in Michigan)
more than ten years ago, the experiment failed to make converts when enrollments were
booming. But in 1973 a number of institutions, including Dartmouth, Colgate, and Yale,
rediscovered the 12-month campus.

Student loans.

Rising prime rates have made it increasingly difficult for middle class families to get relatively
low-interest (8.5 percent) government-guaranteed loans from commercial banks. Meanwhile, the
Office of Education has expressed concern over the repayment of earlier loans. An estimated
60,000 college and trade school students were reported to have defaulted on $55.2 million in
federally guaranteed loans over a five-year period. However, with about $6 billion in such loans
provided to 6.1 million students since the program started eight years ago, the actual incidence of
defaults, both in numbers of students and in actual dollar amounts, remains slightly below 1
percent.

Carnegie Commission.

The Carnegie Commission on Higher Education, which was established by the Carnegie
Corporation of New York in 1967, concluded its historic analysis of the country's colleges and
universities with the publication of the last of almost 90 volumes treating questions ranging from
finance to academic reform. The separate reports and recommendations were published by
McGraw-Hill.

Job market.

The most serious employment problem for college graduates for the remainder of the 1970's is
that some 1-1.5 million graduates will have to take jobs which will not make full use of their
capabilities, according to a Carnegie Commission study 'Graduates and Jobs: Adjusting to a New
Labor Market Situation.' But although such a situation may be frustrating, the study stated, it is
no reason for society to take precipitate action to cut back its support of higher education.
According to the report, the 1973-1974 outlook for new college graduates will be better than the
outlook during the previous four years. Prospects were seen as bright for persons entering health-
care occupations and salaried positions in private industry, in public and nonprofit agencies, and
in accounting. Engineering is also reported to be offering greater employment opportunities, after
several years of cutbacks. But poor prospects continued in teaching, and the job market for
Ph.D.'s was seen as remaining unfavorable during most of the 1970's, with the surplus most
serious in the humanities. Shortages, however, are expected to be reappearing in engineering and
the physical sciences.

School impact.

A study of educational achievement in 19 countries, the most extensive such survey ever
undertaken, indicated that although home background tends to be the most important factor in a
pupil's academic success, the contribution made by the schools, particularly if students are
required to work hard, is also of great importance. The survey, in which 300 specialists gathered
information for seven years from 258,000 students and 50,000 teachers, was undertaken by the
Stockholm-based International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement at a
cost of $5.25 million.
Among the study's key findings was that the upper 10 percent (in achievement) of students in
U.S. schools, tested in their senior year in high school, performed better in reading
comprehension than similar groups in all other participating countries, even those with highly
selective schools. This means, according to Torsten Husén, the study's Swedish director, that the
egalitarian approach of universal education, as practiced in the United States, does not lower
standards for the academic elite. At the same time, the study found that a far greater number of
students with lower socioeconomic backgrounds enter the top academic group of high schools
seniors in the United States than in such selective systems as those of Germany or France. The
survey interpreted these findings as indicating that the mass-education system, without
penalizing the schooling of the gifted, tends to prevent society from becoming stratified.
The study also showed that most of the schools studied in all countries tend to allow a widening
of the gap between male and female students in science and mathematics achievement. At the
same time, the survey indicated that the gap narrows in coeducational schools, compared with
single-sex education.

School systems.

The number of local school systems in the United States continues to decline. In 1960, there
were 40,500 school districts. As a result of consolidation, NEA 1972 estimates put the number of
districts at 17,036. At the same time, the number of one-teacher rural schools has declined from
20,200 to approximately 2,000.

Progress report.

An analysis of the 1970 Census indicates that Americans are becoming increasingly more
educated. Eight of ten persons aged 20 to 21 have at least a high school education; among
persons 30 to 34 years old, 69 percent had completed high school; among those 55 to 64 years
old, the figure was 40 percent; and of those 75 years and older, only 24 percent were high school
graduates.
Over half the population 25 years of age or older has completed high school. Among the native-
born of native parentage, 57 percent of whites, 31 percent of blacks, 33 percent of American
Indians, and 56 percent of persons of other races have completed high school. Among the
foreign-born, 36 percent of those from Europe, 32 percent of those from Mexico and Central and
South America, and 46 percent of those from other countries have a high school education.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007. © 1993-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Questions and Answers About Education

A leading voice in American education, Paul D. Houston, executive director of the American Association of School
Administrators, answers questions from parents about a range of education issues. For example, what is the value of
preschooling? Is education in the United States on the decline? Why are some parents choosing homeschooling and other
alternatives to the public school system? Should the school year be lengthened? Is there any value in taking preparation courses
for the SAT and the PSAT? Houston offers sober and well-rounded answers to these and many other questions.

Questions and Answers About Education

Q: When did preschools become a regular part of early childhood education? I started school in
kindergarten! Are preschools necessary? What are the advantages and disadvantages of sending
your three- or four-year-old child to preschool? What qualities should I look for in a preschool?
How much does it cost?
A: Preschool has grown in popularity over the last 20 years or so. This came about, in part,
because of the brain research that started showing how much the first five years of life affect
later learning. It is now pretty clear that most of the 'wiring' of the brain is done long before
children reach formal schooling. An environment that is rich in stimuli is best for the intellectual
development of children. Also, it is generally recognized that early contact with other children
helps social development.
Homes that are rich in stimuli and that offer children lots of opportunity for social contact
certainly provide much of what a preschool does. So, to answer your question, “Is preschool
necessary?” the answer is, “It depends on the other support the child has.” If I had young
children today, I would make sure they went to preschool. The disadvantage is the loss of time
with the parent; spending time with the parents is also very important for the child.
Preschool also grew in response to the rise in families with two working parents. If there is a
stay-at-home mom or dad available, the child has wonderful opportunities. The best
combination, I feel, is a good part-day preschool coupled with rich parent involvement at home.
As for qualities of preschool, most states now have some standards they should meet, such as
sanitation. I would visit and try to get a feel for the preschool. Is there a lot of imaginary play? Is
the environment attractive and stimulating? Do the children seem to be happy and having a good
time? Preschool isn't so much about school as it is preparation for school. There should be a lot
of directed play—that is, play in which the children think they’re playing but the play has some
learning embedded in it.
Cost varies greatly. It can be reduced in some areas through co-op preschools, in which parents
are required to volunteer at the school each week.
Q: My son was born on January 7, 1997. Every school in our district demands that a child's
birthdate be at least five days before December 31 for enrollment in kindergarten. Should he
waste one more year at home because of this seven-day delay? Is there any other way to get him
admitted into kindergarten?
A: It depends on your child’s development. Is he big for his age, or mature? If so, I would try to
get around the enrollment policy. If he is small, or still a little immature, I would wait.
Schools have a very arbitrary date for kindergarten enrollment. That is simply because most feel
that they have to have SOME date set. There are always children who just miss the cut. One way
around it is to enroll the child in private school for a year or so and then transfer him back to
public school. Once the child has gone through kindergarten and/or first grade, most schools will
automatically accept that child as a transfer regardless of age. Check your local district’s policy
on this.
The big question for you as a parent is, will enrolling your child early put too much pressure on
him, or is he really ready to dig into school?
Q: Politicians often speak of a crisis in public education in the United States. Were schools
notably better in the past?
A: The short answer is no, they weren’t. There has been a lot of hysteria about comparing
schools to a past “golden era” of education when scores were supposedly higher, students were
better behaved, and schools were more effective. Even a cursory examination of history would
show this to be a simplistic view. Two examples make the point.
First, there has been a decline in the SAT scores since the early 1960s. A simplistic analysis
would argue this is proof that schools aren’t as good as they once were. However, when it is
noted that in the early 1960s only about 10 percent of eligible students took the test, whereas
today more than 50 percent do, a different picture emerges.
The average SAT score declined until about 1980. Since then there has been a modest increase in
the average, while a much broader pool of students has been taking the test. The real story of the
SAT is that America has opened up college admission to a much wider portion of the population
than in previous generations. And when you note that the top tier of students (those who
formerly would have been the elite 10 percent taking the test) have actually improved their
scores, the story becomes even more positive.
The second example considers dropout rates. Today nearly 90 percent of American students
complete high school. In the early 1950s only about 50 percent actually finished high school.
The dropout issue is still serious, as those who do not finish are in danger of not making it in our
society. However, we have come a long way in a half-century.
These examples point to the current dilemma of American education. In the 1940s a fourth-grade
reading level was considered literate. Today you need to read at nearly a ninth-grade level to be
functionally literate. In 1950 you could drop out of school and still make a decent living for your
family. Today you cannot. The challenge of American education today isn’t against the standards
of yesterday. It is against the standards of tomorrow, calling for abilities and skills not dreamed
of on a mass level a few generations ago. American education faces serious challenges. They just
don’t happen to be against the past.
Q: What role does the United States government play in education?
A: Some schools are primarily the responsibility of the federal government, such as Native
American schools and military schools. Only about 7 percent of the money for other schools
comes from the federal government. However, this money has historically been targeted to
students with greater need, so districts that have large numbers of these students are more
dependent on the federal government for support. For example, it is not unusual for large urban
districts to get 15 percent to 20 percent of their funding through federal dollars. Federal dollars
have also been used to help with specific problems, such as drug prevention or access to
technology.
Part of the controversy over the federal role has been around the issue of “unfunded mandates.”
These are requirements set by the federal government that the schools must follow, but without
sufficient federal funding for implementation. An example would be the Individuals with
Disabilities Education Act of 1975, which lays out very specific rules and regulations for how
schools should address the education of students with disabilities. When the bill was passed, the
federal government promised to provide 40 percent of the costs of implementing the bill. It has
yet to provide one-fourth of what was originally promised, so local schools are faced with
meeting requirements without adequate resources.
The other role the federal government plays is that of preacher in the “bully pulpit.” The federal
government is able, through law and rhetoric, to shine a spotlight on certain issues that local and
state governments should attend to. This has ranged from focusing on civil rights issues to
ensuring more equitable treatment of women in sports.
It is likely there will always be some tension between the role of the federal government and that
of the states. It is increasingly clear that in a world dominated by the information economy, the
welfare of the nation will depend on the quality of its education. This is clearly an issue of
national interest. But laws and tradition reserve most of the responsibility for the states and local
communities.
Q: Can you outline the differences between Montessori, Waldorf, and traditional schools,
especially for preschool through elementary? What are the pros and cons of each educational
philosophy?
A: Montessori is based on the teachings of Maria Montessori, who had very definite feelings
about how young children should be taught. There is great emphasis on creative expression in
Montessori schools. Most people I know whose children have gone to Montessori schools loved
them. Whether a Montessori school is right for your child depends on whether the school’s
philosophy is aligned with yours.
Traditional schools have tended to push skills a little harder at the younger ages (although this
varies greatly by district). With the current pressure for even greater accountability from schools,
this is even stronger today than it was a few years ago. Although I am a strong proponent of
public schools, I am personally dismayed by this trend. Education should be a balance between
skills and creative expression—between the head and the heart. If I had a young child today,
that's what I would seek in a school for my child.
Q: In California, salaries and benefits are competitive, yet school districts are having great
difficulty recruiting and retaining qualified teachers, principals, chief business officials, and
superintendents. Is this a national trend?
A: There is a serious teacher shortage across the country in nearly every field. Certain subjects,
such as math, science, and special education, are especially hard-hit by the shrinking numbers of
available educators, as are schools in urban or rural areas. While suburban districts still manage
to find teachers and administrators, many report that their pool of qualified candidates is getting
shallower. Moreover, as the baby boom generation nears retirement, this problem is likely to get
worse.
The cause for today’s shortage is multifaceted. Our booming economy has given many more job
options to people who might otherwise be teachers. Although salaries for educators have
improved, they have not kept pace with the competition, and teaching still is not considered a
prime occupation.
Today’s emphasis on raising school standards, requiring entrance tests for teachers, and
expanding other requirements has also diminished the pool. Some experts worry that the more
prescriptive curriculum driven by state standards and testing will further diminish interest in
teaching as a profession. In addition, increased accountability without matching increases in
authority or resources has caused many administrators to leave the profession behind.
What to do? Clearly, states are going to have to consider further pay increases. It has been
suggested that making educators’ contracts a full year with commensurate pay would be
appropriate. Better and earlier recruitment into teaching ranks is also required, and there may be
a need to revisit earlier incentive programs that were abandoned years ago—more government
subsidy of undergraduate training, loan forgiveness for those who actually teach, extra pay for
teachers in hard-to-find fields and areas ('combat' pay for inner city teachers, for example).
There will be no easy fixes, and the nation is in for a difficult time. Just when everyone seems to
have finally recognized how central education is to our future, those who are providing it are
getting harder to find and keep.
Q: What are the main reasons parents choose to homeschool their children?
A: There are nearly as many reasons as there are homeschoolers, but the underlying issue seems
to be one of control: Who will control the content, style of teaching, and values taught?
Homeschooling started with parents at the political fringes of the right and left who either
wanted their children taught good Christian values or did not want them controlled by a state
system that might indoctrinate them into a certain way of thinking.
More recently, the homeschooling movement has broadened to include a wider cross section of
people. Many of them are dissatisfied with their child’s education for a variety of reasons. Some
parents feel it isn’t personal enough to meet the unique needs of their child, that it isn’t flexible
enough to challenge their child, or that it isn’t structured enough to provide a strong basic
education. With access to curriculums via the Internet and with the proliferation of curricular
options—such as commercially produced books, audio tapes, CD-ROMs, and Web sites—
homeschooling has become a realistic option for many parents who are willing to invest their
own time in educating their child. It is a movement that has not yet peaked.
Q: Our local elementary is beginning a preschool-through-sixth-grade dual-language program.
The curriculum will be the same as that at any other school, but lessons like math and science
will be taught on a two-day alternating schedule. Every word they hear, read, and write will be in
English for two days and in Spanish the next two. They offer four full school days per week for
the four-year-old preschoolers and the five-year-old kindergarteners. Is this too much for the
earliest age groups?
A: Dual-language programs are becoming more popular. I understand your concern over whether
this kind of program is too much for a young child. The research is pretty clear that language
acquisition is done best at early ages. The younger the child is, the easier it is for him or her to
attain a second language. For that reason I would doubt if a young child would have difficulty in
adjusting to this kind of program; most children could well flourish if the program is taught well.
Q: What are the best ways to prepare for the PSAT and SAT? Do test-preparation courses help?
A: Those who prepare the tests claim that test-preparation courses do not help and that the best
preparation is ongoing diligence and effort in the learning process. Those running the test-
preparation companies claim success in raising scores. The reality is no doubt in the middle.
Knowing how to take a test and preparing for that process will help eliminate some of the
anxiety these tests can produce. Test-preparation courses could have some impact on scores by
increasing a student’s familiarity with the test-taking process.
Becoming familiar with the vocabulary words and math techniques in the tests would certainly
be an advantage. Preparation should start much earlier than the last year of high school, however.
Students should work on their vocabulary, read and write extensively, and make certain that they
take the proper math courses throughout their high school years.
It is important to remember that these tests are called aptitude tests and are designed to try to
predict the eventual success of a student in college. They are not designed to measure the quality
of a student’s academic preparation or a student’s intelligence. Instead, they are designed to
predict how a student might do in a college setting. Therefore, the best preparation would be for
the student to be exposed to a collegiate atmosphere, which is provided by high schools with
high teacher expectations and an abundance of advanced-placement and honors courses.
The “dirty little secret” of American testing outcomes is that the one variable with the highest
correlation to performance on these tests is family income. The higher the income of the family,
the higher the scores; the lower the income, the lower the scores. Higher-income families tend to
live in communities where high schools offer more learning opportunities, and they tend to
provide home environments that foster academic achievement.
Q: What are school vouchers, and why are they controversial?
A: School vouchers would give parents some monetary amount to use for the education of their
children in any public or private school they choose. Arguments for and against vouchers strike
at the core of what public education means in a democratic society. Proponents view education
as a private good to be owned and controlled by parents, while opponents view it as a public
good to be overseen by the public through elected representatives.
Proponents claim that vouchers would empower parents to choose where they send their children
to school. This argument holds that parents could help their children escape from failing schools,
a benefit for the family and for society in general because their children would receive better
educations. This argument has become influential because of growing concerns about the quality
of public education in some communities. Proponents also say that vouchers would improve
schools by activating the forces of the marketplace: If schools had to compete for students, then
bad schools would shape up and do a better job.
Opponents believe that vouchers would undermine the quality of public education by draining
away money and students from public schools to private schools. About 10 percent of eligible
children already attend private schools, and fairness would dictate they should receive money as
well as those choosing to move from public to private schools. Where will that money come
from? It must be raised either by significantly increasing overall government funding for schools
or by significantly reducing funding for public schools.
Opponents also cite the constitutional problems of separation of church and state, because
vouchers would allow parents to spend tax dollars on education sponsored by religious
institutions. They also point out that although it is billed as parent choice, there is no guarantee
that the school chosen by the parent would, in fact, accept the student or that the voucher would
be large enough to pay the tuition in the higher caliber private schools. Some opponents also
worry about the lack of accountability for public dollars, as there would be no government
oversight of the private schools. To provide that oversight would change the nature of private
education, and for this reason some of the more vocal opponents to vouchers have actually been
private-school supporters.
Q: How does the length of the school year in the United States compare to that in other
countries?
A: The United States has traditionally had one of the shorter school years among the developed
countries. The good news is that while American students attend school for fewer days (180-190
days versus 220-240 days in other developed countries), the actual time spent in school is
comparable. That is because the American school day tends to be longer. The real difference
between the educational systems of the United States and other countries comes in the area of
curriculum and instruction—what is taught and how it is taught—and in the cultural values
embedded in the society. For example, Japanese students attend regular school and then after-
school tutoring sessions, supplemented by mentoring by their mothers. Japanese students spend
less time watching television, taking private music or dance lessons, or participating in after-
school jobs or sports. To move to the Japanese model of education would require significant
changes in the way American families raise their children and live their lives.
In some American communities there has been a movement toward a so-called year-round
program. This has been done in some cases to maximize the use of school buildings. The
students and teachers don’t attend school for a longer time; rather, the school year is cut up into
shorter blocks of time and students have more frequent vacations, instead of one long summer
vacation. This system has proven controversial, however, since it interferes with traditional
family vacations and childcare schedules.
Q: Can local school districts choose whether their schools will teach the theory of evolution?
A: The American public education system emphasizes local control. Historically this has meant
that local communities have had a lot of direction over their schools. The United States
Constitution considers public education a state function, and local districts only have as much
latitude in making decisions about schools as the state gives them.
Increasingly, states have been taking back much of the control through the selection of
textbooks, the creation of curricular frameworks and state standards, and the imposition of state
tests. All these have served to minimize the control that local boards have over what is taught in
schools and how it is taught. The latitude that a local board has over whether to teach
evolutionary theory is very much dependent on state policy.
The teaching of various theories of how the world and humankind developed has proved to be
controversial because they involve individual views and religious beliefs. From the notorious
Scopes trial in the 1920s to the present day, this issue has been a major source of dispute. In a
diverse society with many views of the origins of our existence, the teaching of one theory over
others is sure to be a subject of controversy.
Q: Why do schools let out for the summer?
A: The reason the U.S. school year is the way it is stems from the nation’s early days as an
agrarian society. School let out in the spring so children could help with the planting, growing,
and harvesting of crops during the warmer months. School resumed in the fall once the crops
were in. While few students today live in that world, the traditions that were created during that
time continue today.
Q: What impression does a teacher's dress and appearance make on students?
A: There are no clear directions on this issue. Court rulings and teacher contracts have removed
most of the clout school districts had to direct a certain dress code toward staff.
The courts have tended to rule that dress is an individual expression protected by the Bill of
Rights. Teacher unions have been pretty strong in protecting individual teacher's rights to dress
as they choose.
The upshot of this has been lower overall dress standards than existed in previous generations.
Further, as younger teachers come into the profession, they bring with them a much more
informal set of dress expectations. This can also been seen in the business world, as many
companies have adopted looser dress codes for employees.
To provide a better example for students, some districts have been trying to set higher standards
for dress. Whether this will take hold remains to be seen.
Meanwhile, many districts have adopted voluntary uniform policies for students. These policies
unexpectedly have led to an improvement in the dress of the staff, administrators say.
Q: Is there really a shortage of teachers in the United States?
A: The candidate pool for teaching positions has gotten significantly smaller over the last few
years. Thanks to a strong economy, those who previously might have entered the teaching ranks
have many other options. In addition, an increased emphasis on accountability, such as tougher
qualifications for new teachers and constant pressure to improve student test scores, has made
the teaching role seem less creative and less attractive to many people. Once in the profession,
the latitude for individual initiative is hampered by the imposition of external standards and
curriculum. The keys to attracting teachers are reasonable compensation and working conditions.
While compensation for teachers has generally improved, it continues to lag behind other
professions, and many people continue to view teaching as a position for which pay is not
commensurate with responsibility.
The teacher shortage tends to vary by region, type of district, and type of teacher. The regions
with the greatest problems recruiting teachers tend to be urban and rural areas, where inadequate
school funding and resources produce teaching challenges and low teacher salaries. Math and
science teacher shortages have arisen because of competition with the private sector for those
with that training. The increased emphasis on special education and the unique challenges those
children present have created teacher shortages in that field. Growing numbers of immigrant
children—but not of teachers who speak their languages—have led to teacher shortages in the
area of bilingual education. Teaching has always been a calling, and the current challenges still
require individuals who are dedicated to the mission of helping children.
Q: What do teachers think of new testing requirements for assessing their teaching skills and
knowledge?
A: The testing of teachers comes out of the standards movement, which seeks to define what
teachers should teach and what students should know. The idea is that raising standards will
produce a higher level of student achievement. Standards have been developed in all subject
areas and students in many states are now being tested to see if they are reaching those standards.
Many states have incorporated various new requirements on teachers. These range from raising
the GPA requirement of students going into teaching to requiring the passage of basic skill tests
for prospective teachers. This situation has naturally evolved into requiring more difficult tests
prior to teacher certification.
Most educators have not had great problems with these new requirements if the tests bear some
direct correlation to the work the teacher will do once they are in a classroom. There still remains
much to be done to align these tests to the real work of teaching.
Massachusetts recently gained some notoriety because so many of their prospective teachers
failed the test for certification. Questions were raised on whether the test was a fair assessment of
what people knew or needed to know about teaching. As long as there is a misalignment or
perceived misalignment, these tests will be subject to criticism and doubt.
Greater controversy has arisen from requiring teachers already in the field to pass tests to remain
in the classroom. These requirements appeared to change the rules after the fact and created a lot
of backlash among teachers. Most states backed away from these requirements.
On a much more positive note, the National Board for Professional Teaching Standards has
developed a rigorous teacher-assessment process that has grown in popularity and acceptance.
Research has shown that it tends to recognize quality in teaching, and teachers who go through
the process receive a certificate. It can be expected that this will continue to be accepted and
embraced by teachers, administrators, school boards, and politicians. To the degree individual
states model their requirements on the National Board’s teacher assessment, which is considered
to be a comprehensive and authentic process, the requirements will be better accepted by those in
the profession.
Q: How do American schoolchildren compare to their peers in other countries in terms of
performance on standardized tests?
A: This is a simple question with a complex answer. When merely looking at test results, the
simplest answer is that American children tend not to do well. However, the truth is not that
simple.
The reality is that there are significant differences in test sample, cultural expectations, and
curricula from country to country, and looking at test scores without an examination of the
broader contextual issues is fairly useless.
For example, Singapore tends to outscore the United States on most measures by a good margin.
It is worth noting, however, that Singapore has about the same number of children as one of the
United States’ large urban districts, its culture is significantly different, and it does not have the
United States’ diverse population. So a comparison, while interesting, is fairly meaningless.
Further, most of the comparisons are on rank order. For example, you could say that the United
States ranks 9th out of 18 on a particular sample. However, the difference between 1st and 9th
may be fairly insignificant. Educational researcher Gerald Bracey is fond of pointing out that in
the Olympics there is a very small difference in time between the people who come in first and
last in the 100-meter dash, and yet we don’t call the last-place finisher “pokey.”
Not all countries teach the same subjects at the same time and in the same way. Some excellent
studies show that the way math and science are taught in some countries is markedly different
than how these subjects are taught in the United States. Further, if a student hasn’t taken algebra
as a subject, that student won’t do well on an algebra test.
Also, there has been a tendency for the press to cover score comparisons where U.S. children
don’t do well and not cover those where they do perform well. A lower rank on the TIMSS
(Third International Mathematics and Science Study) gets a bigger headline than a second-place
finish on an international third-grade reading test.
The bottom line? Read the headlines on international comparisons cautiously.
Q: My daughter is 16 months old and has been saying her ABCs for 3 months. She was speaking
full sentences at 8 months, and she knows some of her colors. I don't want to push her, but what
would be an appropriate next step for her development?
A: I am not an early childhood expert, but generally for very young children I recommend
reading or playing word games together. The important thing is for very young children to grow
in a language-rich environment. That way they not only get the sounds of words, but also the
love of words that will lead naturally into reading. It is a good idea not to push very young
children faster or farther than they are ready to go.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007. © 1993-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.

Remedial Education
I INTRODUCTION

Student in Remedial Education

Remedial education programs seek to help students catch up to a desired level of academic achievement. Here a teacher gives a student one-on-
one remedial instruction in reading.
Ann Summa/Liaison Agency

Remedial Education, special instruction designed to help students catch up to a desired level of academic achievement. In the
United States and Canada, remedial education is common at all levels of schooling, from preschools through colleges and
universities. The most common remedial education programs focus on developing students’ basic skills in reading, writing, and
mathematics.
Some remedial education programs attempt to remedy insufficient learning in previous academic settings. These programs
typically involve reteaching subjects or redesigning lessons to make the instruction clearer or more personalized for individual
students. Remedial programs may also be designed to compensate for an educational disadvantage. For instance, a preschool
program may provide learning opportunities designed to help children who are considered at risk of educational failure because
of limited English proficiency. In higher education, a remedial math course may help some first-year college or university
students compensate for inadequate preparation in math during high school.

Remedial education is based on the presumption that a student underachieves because of extrinsic (environmental) factors, such
as poverty or insufficient access to high-quality education. Remedial education thus differs from special education, where the
source of the learning difficulty is generally viewed as intrinsic—that is, due to a disability or disorder that exists within the
individual. To avoid a common misperception that students in remedial programs have an intrinsic learning difficulty, some
educators in the United States prefer to use the term developmental education rather than remedial education. Most educators
consider programs in English as a Second Language (ESL) to be neither remedial, developmental, nor special education but a
separate category of educational support.

Historically, schools allowed children to fall behind academically if they had difficulty matching the achievement of their peers.
Most students who found learning difficult eventually dropped out of school to find work in occupations that did not require high
levels of educational achievement. However, as society has changed and work has become more complex, the accepted minimum
levels of educational achievement have steadily risen, especially since the 1960s. Enrollment levels in remedial education
programs have likewise risen.

II THE NEED FOR REMEDIAL EDUCATION

Many students need additional instructional support in a particular subject at some point in their school years. Some students
need more remedial support than others.

Many educators consider remedial education necessary to overcome the ill effects of poverty. Schools always have had difficulty
educating children who live in economically disadvantaged households. Educational researchers note that relatively few low-
income households are able to afford educational resources that could help create a rich, supportive learning environment in the
home. For instance, families living in poverty are less likely to be able to afford books, computers, encyclopedias, and other
learning resources. Children in such households often have difficulty matching the academic achievement of more advantaged
children who live in homes and communities that provide greater access to educational resources. In addition, parents with low
incomes typically have lower levels of educational attainment themselves. These parents often find it difficult to offer their
children the same sort of academic advice and support that wealthier and better-educated parents can provide their own children.

Schools in lower-income communities are typically funded less than schools in higher-income communities. On various
measures, such as class sizes, teacher qualifications, access to curriculum materials, and library facilities, schools in lower-
income communities rank below those in higher-income communities. The result is that often students in lower-income
communities receive a lower-quality education. This problem produces a greater need for remedial education programs.

There are many other reasons why students may fall behind academically and need remedial instruction. Teachers differ in their
expertness for teaching math, reading, and other subjects. Thus, a student might need remedial help if he had teacher A in first
grade but not if he had been lucky enough to have teacher B. School systems also differ in their support for teachers. In a school
district with overcrowded classrooms, the same teacher B might be overwhelmed with work and not be able to attend to
individual needs as well. Finally, parent involvement plays an important role in a student’s learning. Students whose parents are
highly involved in their education are less likely to need remedial help than students whose parents are not involved.

III PLACEMENT IN REMEDIAL COURSES

Many schools administer standardized tests to determine which students would benefit from placement in a remedial course.
Students whose test scores fall below a predetermined level are eligible for remedial education. Many elementary and secondary
schools may also place students in remedial courses based on a teacher’s recommendation. For instance, a history teacher may
suggest a remedial reading course for a student who seems to have difficulty keeping up with the required reading for the class.
Some colleges and universities may place students in remedial programs based on an analysis of courses completed in high
school.

Eligibility for remedial programs does not always mean that such instruction will be provided. In the United States, for instance,
fewer than 20 percent of high school students eligible for remedial reading classes are offered such instruction. The eligibility
levels vary from school to school, as does the likelihood of receiving remedial instruction. Often demand for remedial education
exceeds supply. That is, there are more students who qualify for services than there are funds to provide the needed services.
Remedial instruction is typically made mandatory only for certain students at the college and university level.

IV ELEMENTARY AND SECONDARY SCHOOL PROGRAMS

Remedial education courses are more common in elementary and junior high schools than in high schools. Many elementary
schools strive to introduce remedial education as early as possible, generally in the primary grades (kindergarten to grade 3).
Educators target these grades because research indicates that overcoming difficulties in reading, writing, and math becomes more
difficult as children grow older. At the secondary school level, many students require remedial support to help meet graduation
standards.

In the United States, the federal Title I program, administered by the U.S. Department of Education, provides funding for
remedial programs in approximately 90 percent of all school districts. A school district becomes eligible for Title I funds
primarily based on the estimated number of children in the district who come from low-income families. Most school districts
concentrate their Title I grants to fund remedial programs in the elementary grades. Approximately 11 percent of elementary and
secondary school students in the United States attend a remedial program funded through Title I. In Canada, funding for remedial
education is more decentralized. School districts receive general funds from their province or territory’s Ministry of Education,
and each district decides on its own how much to fund remedial programs. Most remedial education programs in Canada do not
receive federal funding. However, school districts with employment-preparation programs may apply for funding from Human
Resources Development Canada, a federal agency.

In many respects, instruction in remedial courses is similar to instruction in regular, or mainstream, courses. However, schools
typically limit the class size of remedial courses to a relatively small number of students per teacher. This class size gives
teachers more opportunity to respond to the unique needs of individual students. Most remedial education classes consist of
groups of fewer than ten students per teacher. In some cases, one-on-one tutoring (one instructor working with one student) can
help the student make substantial gains in achievement in a relatively short period of time. One-on-one tutoring can be especially
effective in remedial reading programs. However, most schools lack the resources to provide instruction on such a personal level.

Elementary and secondary schools usually offer remedial programs during normal school hours, but increasing numbers of
schools offer after-school and summer-school programs. These programs appear to be the most successful ones because
participating students do not have to miss regular classroom instruction while attending the remedial course and thus benefit from
the additional time spent in classes.

V COLLEGE AND UNIVERSITY PROGRAMS

Remedial Programs in U.S. Higher Education

Almost all American community colleges offer remedial reading, writing, and mathematics courses. Remedial programs are designed to help
students catch up academically by teaching basic academic skills. In a given year, remedial courses serve about two-fifths of students at public
community colleges and about one-fourth of students at private two-year colleges in the United States. Remedial courses are less common at
four-year colleges.
© Microsoft Corporation. All Rights Reserved.

Colleges and universities in the United States first introduced remedial courses in reading, writing, and mathematics during the
19th century. As college enrollments rose during the 20th century, the number of remedial programs in American higher
education also increased. Today, college remedial programs—sometimes called college prep programs—are offered in virtually
all community colleges, in more than 80 percent of public four-year universities, and in more than 60 percent of private four-year
institutions in the United States. About 30 percent of students entering U.S. colleges and universities take at least one remedial
course, but the percentage of students enrolled in remedial courses varies widely from school to school.

In Canada, it is rare for universities to offer remedial instruction, although some offer basic-level courses for no academic credit.
Students who wish to enroll in a university must meet its basic entry requirements; some students may attend summer school or
adult education classes before applying to meet these requirements. Canadian community colleges serve mainly to provide
vocational and technical training.
Most American colleges and universities design their remedial courses to increase academic achievement in reading, writing, or
mathematics. Completion of college-level remedial courses usually does not count as academic credit that can be applied toward
an academic degree or program. Colleges and universities may require some students to satisfactorily complete particular
remedial courses before they can take other courses for credit.

Colleges and universities also offer remedial help through instructional support centers or tutoring programs. These resources
provide assistance for students already enrolled in standard, for-credit courses or programs. For example, many colleges have a
writing center where students can receive assistance on writing assignments. Many also have similar centers to support
mathematics or other specific courses, such as chemistry and physics. Some colleges and universities provide students with
access to personal tutors who offer academic support in a variety of subjects. Instructional support centers and tutoring services
rarely offer academic credit to students who use these programs.

Colleges and universities generally offer remedial courses during the normal school year, from fall through spring. Many also
offer remedial programs during the summer. Some colleges require entering students who need remedial instruction to enroll in
the summer so they can complete all necessary remedial study before their first year of college study begins.

VI ISSUES AND TRENDS

Currently, students from low-income families are overrepresented in remedial classes at all levels. Because a larger proportion of
minority families have poverty-level incomes than families in the general population, minority students are also
disproportionately represented in remedial classes. However, since the 1960s the differences in academic achievement between
low-income and middle-class students have steadily narrowed. Likewise, the differences in achievement between minority
students and white students have also become smaller. Some scholars attribute these trends to the concurrent rise of remedial
education programs throughout the country.

Despite these gains, some educators and policymakers have proposed alternatives to remedial education in elementary and
secondary schools. For example, some schools require students to repeat grades if their academic achievement falls below a
targeted level. Many educators disagree with this policy, pointing to research indicating that students who repeat grades
demonstrate no long-term gains in academic achievement. Critics also argue that requiring students to repeat grades is generally
more expensive for school districts than implementing well-designed remedial education.

Some politicians and some trustees of colleges and universities have proposed eliminating college remedial programs altogether.
They argue that colleges and universities should not have to reteach the material that high schools should have taught students in
the first place. Defenders of remedial education claim that without remedial programs in colleges and universities, many high
school graduates would never have the opportunity to attend college. These remedial education advocates argue that low-
achieving high-school graduates would be forced to take low-paying jobs, receive government assistance, or impose costs on
society in some other way. Increasingly, colleges and universities have responded to this debate by shifting most remedial
education programs to two-year community colleges. For example, in 1998 the board of trustees at the City University of New
York voted to end remedial classes at the system’s four-year colleges and permit them only at its two-year community colleges.
Other four-year institutions have discontinued their own remedial programs and instead contract with local community colleges
to offer remedial classes to their students.
Contributed By:
Sheila M. Bennett
Richard Allington

The Debate Over Education Reform

Public dissatisfaction with America’s public schools has increased steadily in the past few decades. Lawmakers, reformers, and
educators have proposed and instituted numerous reforms to the system. But whether these reforms have imposed higher
standards, increased federal spending for education, or made other changes, few reforms have met the expectations of everyone
involved. In this March 1999 Encarta Yearbook article, Stanford University professor of education Michael W. Kirst discusses
various reform efforts and explains why education reform remains such a contentious issue.

The Debate Over Education Reform

By Michael W. Kirst

American attitudes toward the public schools have changed radically in the last 50 years. In the
1940s public opinion polls showed that 87 percent of Americans were satisfied with the public
school system. By the late 1990s, however, many Americans believed the school system was in
need of an overhaul, and in the November 1998 congressional elections voters in nearly every
state ranked education reform as the number one or number two issue on their minds.
This change in attitude began in the 1960s and 1970s, but a major impetus was a 1983 U.S.
Department of Education report titled A Nation at Risk. By linking U.S. economic troubles in the
late 1970s and early 1980s to perceived problems with the U.S. education system, A Nation at
Risk sent the message that the public schools were standing in the way of a strong economy,
sparking a crisis of confidence in the public school system.
As a result many politicians found themselves called upon to “fix the schools” and “restore their
greatness,” triggering a 15-year period of reform. The results of this effort remain unclear.
Although most experts believe further reforms are warranted, the agreement ends there. Some
want to toughen curriculum requirements and increase teachers' salaries to attract more
competent teachers, while others think the answer lies in tackling issues such as poor parenting
and poverty, which they believe are the main impediments to progress in education. Still others
want to offer parents greater choices in selecting schools for their children by establishing new
types of schools that would compete with public schools for students and resources.

A Unique System

The U.S. public school system is gigantic, with roughly $314 billion in annual expenditures, 5.4
million employees (2.7 million of which are teachers), and 46 million pupils. It also has many
unique qualities that set it apart from school systems in other industrialized nations, such as local
control, local funding, and a commitment to provide a kindergarten through 12th grade education
to every student who enters the system.
When it was created in the mid-19th century, the U.S. public school system was viewed as a
means of improving society. This is one of the reasons the system has aimed to serve all pupils
for 13 years, while other countries developed educational systems that removed underachieving
students at younger ages. The inclusive nature of the U.S. school system has played a crucial role
in unifying a nation of immigrants, transmitting national values and concepts, and offering—in
theory, if not always in practice—the promise of equal opportunity through equal education.
Until recently, the U.S. public school system largely lived up to this goal, producing a high
percentage of high-school graduates compared to other nations. In 1960, for example, 77 percent
of American 25-year-olds were high-school graduates, compared to 60 percent in the United
Kingdom and 46 percent in Australia. All three countries have since improved those numbers.
By 1996 the number of American and British 25-year-olds who were high-school graduates had
risen to 87 percent, while Australia improved to 62 percent.
Another unique feature of the U.S. system is that it vests authority over the schools with
thousands of local school boards rather than a centralized, national agency. Local control enables
authorities to respond quickly to local needs, changing curriculums and teaching methods
without having to seek permission from national authorities.
Critics of this system, however, note that, unlike many other countries, the United States has no
national standards for what students should know at certain grade levels. Nor are there uniform
standards for teacher training and certification. The diversity of the U.S. system has also fostered
numerous layers of bureaucracy and a wide variety of competing constituencies. At times this
fragmentation has inhibited necessary reforms.
Another distinguishing characteristic of the U.S. system is its reliance on state and local property
taxes to finance public schools. State and local taxes make up more than 90 percent of public
school funding, with the remainder supplied by the federal government. Most other nations rely
on national or state sales taxes or income taxes to finance their schools, rather than locally
generated revenue.
Local funding gives communities greater control over their schools, a popular concept among
many Americans. But it also leads to disparities. Property values differ from one residential
community to another, with the result that the funds available to the schools in those
communities also differ. In New York, for example, differences in property tax values mean that
some suburbs spend up to 50 percent more per pupil than New York City.

History of Reform Efforts

A Nation at Risk was not the first broad-reaching report to critique the U.S. public school system.
Various groups of scholars, educators, businesspeople, and lawmakers have found fault with the
system ever since it was established. Many of these critics issued similarly weighty reports to
back up their claims, such as Report of the Committee on Secondary School Studies in 1893, The
Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education in 1918, and The American High School Today in
1959.
Two things are notable about the history of education reform in the United States. First, the
agenda for reform fluctuates dramatically. While Report of the Committee on Secondary School
Studies sought to cut back on elective classes, such as wood shop, in favor of core academic
subjects, The Cardinal Principles of Secondary Education called for the reintroduction of
elective classes in order to keep the interest of students who were not college bound. Reforms
enacted during the 1950s focused on math and science in an effort to educate the next generation
of leaders in science, whereas in the 1960s reformers stressed equity for minority children. By
1983 the focus had shifted again with calls for a return to basics such as reading and math in
order to boost U.S. competitiveness in the international economy.
Second, reform movements rarely meet their goals. An examination of reforms during the 20th
century reveals that while national commissions can succeed in calling attention to potential
problems, the remedies suggested are often ambiguous and their implementation ill-defined.
A Nation at Risk is a recent example. This report argued that American public schools had
declined because they had lost sight of the purpose of public education and expected too little
from students. In the 1970s many schools had added numerous elective courses until curriculums
began to resemble a shopping mall of educational alternatives. To address this issue, A Nation at
Risk recommended cutting electives, adding rigorous academic curriculums, and raising
academic standards. As one legislator put it, “Let's make the little buggers work harder.”
The call to boost academic standards was heeded nationwide as almost every state increased its
high school graduation requirements. A few of the recommended reforms met with serious
resistance. Among these was a proposal to lengthen the school year from 180 days to 200 or even
220 days, which ran up against the tradition of summer vacation that is so deeply embedded in
U.S. culture.
In general, however, the reforms enacted between 1980 and 1990 lacked coherence. This was
largely a result of local politics. Competing interests forced lawmakers to compromise in order to
win support for reform legislation. Specific provisions in reform proposals were rarely in
conflict, but they were often unrelated, sending a mixed message that made it difficult for local
officials to allocate their resources efficiently. In the end, many of the reforms advocated by A
Nation at Risk were implemented inadequately or were never attempted.
That is not to say that A Nation at Risk had little impact on the school system. One of the
legacies of A Nation at Risk was a shift in responsibility for education reforms from local to state
authorities. Historically, state governments had set minimum education standards and left policy
decisions to the nation's approximately 15,000 local school boards. From 1983 to 1990, however,
state governments moved to assert control of education policy.
This trend was supported by data from the federally funded Center for Policy Research in
Education (CPRE), which concluded that state governments were more responsive to calls for
tougher graduation standards than local school boards. The CPRE also found that states
responded more rapidly to proposals for improving the teaching corps. Many states began to
require beginning teachers to hold a bachelor's degree in their subject, placed an emphasis on
hiring teachers with master's degrees, and rewarded veteran teachers who sought continued
education to keep their skills sharp.

Reforms in the 1990s

In the 1990s many school reformers acknowledged that raising academic standards does not
automatically result in higher student achievement. State and local authorities can set minimum
standards but these standards do not necessarily inspire excellence. Reforms depend on whether
local authorities have the ability to implement them, or whether states have the ability to enforce
them. Many reformers concluded that no single solution can address the diverse challenges
facing U.S. schools.
Reform efforts in the 1990s were prompted in part by national and international tests indicating
that academic courses in U.S. public schools offered students little opportunity to apply their
knowledge. For example, a 1992 international study of reading skills, conducted by the
International Association for the Evaluation of Educational Achievement, concluded that 9- and
14-year-olds in the United States compared quite favorably with their counterparts in other
industrialized nations. But while U.S. students did well in comprehending simple paragraphs,
they had difficulty understanding complex readings.
Math and science curriculums were also found lacking. Results from the Third International
Math and Science Study (TIMSS), conducted in 1995 and reported in 1998, appeared to show
that American students' skills declined as they got older. American 4th graders scored at or near
the top in both science and math, 8th graders scored in the middle, and 12th graders fell near the
bottom of the international rankings. Many reformers believed this was the result of curriculums
that failed to expose students to problem solving, statistical inference, and such subjects as
chemistry and physics.
Three key reforms aimed at addressing these issues included:
*Establishing challenging academic standards for what students at certain grade levels should
know and be able to do. By 1999, 46 states had done this in most academic subjects.
*Aligning local policies—such as testing, teacher certification, and professional development—
and accountability programs to state standards. By 1999 every state except Iowa and Nebraska
had statewide student achievement tests, and most were moving to create new standards for
teachers.
*Giving local officials the responsibility for developing instructional approaches that meet state
standards. Only a handful of states have taken this step.
Known as standards-based systemic reform, the aims of this approach were to foster student
mastery of more rigorous and challenging academic content, and to emphasize the need for
students to be able to apply that content. These goals won approval from many educators,
business executives, and others.
Some states have gone further, initiating programs to evaluate and rate public schools. These
efforts were surveyed in a January 1999 report titled “Quality Counts ‘99,” by Education Week, a
weekly publication aimed at education professionals. According to the report, 19 states issued
public ratings of individual schools, and 14 states rewarded successful schools with increased
funding. The report also found that 19 states identified low-performing schools in an effort to
help them improve, while 16 states “took over” failing schools. So far, these state takeovers have
cleaned up fiscal shortcomings, but have a mixed record in boosting student achievement.
Meanwhile, the federal government has also introduced some initiatives to improve the schools.
A proposal to reduce class sizes by hiring 100,000 new teachers was enacted by Congress in
1998 at the urging of President Bill Clinton. Clinton has also pushed for national standards and
tests, and has applauded efforts to put an end to social promotion (a policy of advancing students
to a higher grade based on their age rather than their achievements).
Many members of the Republican Party, however, have objected to national tests and standards,
viewing them as an attempt to centralize the U.S. education system. In March 1999 the
Republican-controlled Congress passed a bill, known as the Ed-Flex bill, that would give local
school authorities more control over federal education funds.
A potential pitfall for all types of school reform is the assumption that a particular policy will
work for all types of students. Tougher curriculums, graduation tests, and required courses, for
example, generally only benefit the top two-thirds of students. The bottom one-third of students
often respond better to different policies. Empowering parents to choose the school they believe
is right for their child, and programs that forge links between schools and potential employers—
such as Aviation High School in New York City—are among the approaches proposed to help
these children.
Some experts, however, contend that these students' poor performance is not the fault of the
educational system, but the result of poverty or inadequate parenting. An influential 1995 book
titled The Manufactured Crisis offered compelling arguments that most problems are
concentrated in poverty-stricken areas, such as the inner cities, and are not inherent in the public
school system itself.
In 1998, 19.9 percent of American children were living in poverty, up from 14 percent in 1969.
Many of these children were minorities or the children of divorced or separated parents. Some
experts believe schools can help these children by improving student access to school health
clinics and counselors and after-school programs, and by coordinating with social service
agencies to prevent child abuse and domestic violence. Some impoverished students perform
well on standardized tests, but poverty and troubled backgrounds are common factors in the lives
of many low-performing students.
Other experts believe increased spending could also help low-performing students, but the
connection is hard to prove without taking students' socioeconomic background into account.
Students from California suburbs, for example, perform better than students from Newark, New
Jersey, despite Newark's higher per-pupil spending. Another proposed fix is to reduce class sizes.
A study from 1984 to 1989 in Tennessee found that students between kindergarten and the third
grade showed improved scores on reading and math tests when class sizes were reduced from an
average of about 23 to an average of about 15.

The Future of Education Reform

While efforts to raise education standards—such as mandated academic courses, more difficult
graduation exams, and ending social promotion—are likely to persist, these approaches leave the
basic structure of the U.S. public education system unchanged. Other proposals would go much
further.
Some reformers advocate what is known as an output performance strategy. This approach
would award bonuses and other incentives to schools and teachers who increase student test
scores, improve attendance, and reduce dropout rates.
Other proposals would end the six-period, 50-minute class structure common in American high
schools, replacing it with a less rigid system. Some reformers have suggested making classes
longer, which would allow students time to complete complicated laboratory experiments or
examine a subject in depth without interruption. There have also been calls for teachers to have
more say in decisions about curriculum structure and teaching methods, and to subject teachers
to a system of peer-review to ensure they remain effective.
Increasing the number and quality of computers, videocassette recorders (VCRs), and other
electronic devices in the classroom is another possible avenue of reform. Technologies such as
computers and Internet access have only recently found their way to U.S. classrooms. In the mid-
1990s only 9 percent of all U.S. public school classrooms had access to the Internet, according to
the National Center for Education Statistics (NCES). The figure for private schools was 5
percent. Some reformers believe technology will eventually free teachers to work with small
groups of students while teaching aides guide students through electronic “classes” designed by
education professionals.
More and more secondary schools may pursue closer links with employers, eventually evolving
into specialized vocational schools. A key component of this strategy would be the opportunity
for students to work part-time with their school's business partner, thus forging a bond between
classroom studies and real-world applications.
Some reformers have called for overhauling the tests used to measure U.S. student achievement.
Critics charge that the multiple choice tests currently used by most U.S. schools are excessively
oriented to low-level skills and inappropriately emphasize single correct answers. Moreover,
many of these tests do not adequately emphasize analytical skills, mathematical problem solving,
and complex reading skills. Other nations, such as the United Kingdom, require written essays
that cannot be scored by a machine and that encourage students to explain the factors at play in a
historical event or a scientific experiment.
Other critics note that many of the tests administered to U.S. students, such as statewide
assessments and National Assessment of Educational Progress (NAEP) tests, have few or no
consequences for those students who perform poorly. Some critics believe the United States
should make “high stakes” tests a nationwide standard. Some states and cities have already done
so. In Florida, for example, students must pass an achievement test in order to graduate from
high school. And in Chicago, Illinois, students must pass year-end tests before moving on to the
next highest grade.
But some of the most controversial reform proposals center around the concept of school choice.
The school choice movement encompasses a broad range of ideas, from voucher programs that
allow students to pay private school tuition with public money, to private companies that sign
contracts to run public schools. The unifying theme is that competition and market-based
incentives are what are needed to reinvigorate the U.S. education system.
School choice proposals include:
*Publicly funded voucher programs. Under most voucher proposals, parents would receive a
voucher equal to their state's average annual expenditure per student. The parents could then use
that money to pay tuition at a private or religious school, or could redeem it at the public school
of their choice. As of 1999 two cities, Milwaukee, Wisconsin, and Cleveland, Ohio, had publicly
funded voucher programs. Both programs are small. Milwaukee's serves less than 2 percent of
the city's pupils, while Cleveland's serves about 3,000 low-income pupils.
*Tax credits for parents who send their children to private schools. These credits could help
defray the cost of sending a child to private school, thus lowering the barrier-to-entry posed by
tuition costs. States that allow tuition or other education-related tax credits include Minnesota
and Arizona.
*Charter schools. These schools are supported by public funds but are operated privately under
“charter” from state and local authorities. Charter schools are allowed to formulate their own
curriculums and policies, and are exempt from many state and local regulations. The charters last
for three to five years and can be revoked at any time if authorities believe the school is
performing unsatisfactorily. In 1999 there were 1,030 charter schools operating in 27 states and
the District of Columbia.
*Adding new magnet schools (schools with a focus, such as science or arts, that can accept
pupils from any part of the school district). Most magnet schools accept students on the basis of
test scores, and many magnet school programs have been around for decades. Some examples
are the Bronx High School of Science in New York City and the Boston Latin School in Boston,
Massachusetts. In 1992 the United States had more than 2,400 magnet schools serving more than
1.2 million students.
*Open enrollment, a system that would allow students to attend any school within or between
school districts. Sixteen states have adopted laws that require school districts with room for more
students to accept transfers from other districts.
*Public schools run by private companies, also known as contract schools. An example is the
Edison Project, a private company that signed contracts to operate public schools in Michigan,
Kansas, and Texas in 1995. In 1999 about 23,000 students attended 51 Edison-run schools in 12
states.
By 2000 tens of thousands of children will be participating in school choice programs in
California alone, a testament to the fact that many families welcome the option to leave their
neighborhood school system for schools that offer “back to basics” education, bold experiments
with new teaching methods, or ethnocentric curriculums. But some choice programs are better
than others, and parents soon find that information to help them judge the relative quality of
these new programs is often scarce.
Many of the claims made by school choice advocates could be assessed scientifically if there
were enough information available to reach definitive conclusions. But for every study that
favors school choice, there is another that reaches an opposite conclusion. For example, a 1997
study by researchers from Harvard University in Cambridge, Massachusetts, and the University
of Houston in Houston, Texas, concluded that student achievement, including test scores, had
improved under Milwaukee's voucher program. But that same year researchers from the
University of Wisconsin in Madison determined that the test score increases were trivial and
offered no justification for the program to be expanded in Milwaukee or adopted elsewhere.
While many school choice supporters believe choice programs will force public schools to
improve in order to compete for students and funding, opponents fear that the loss of students to
choice programs will consign poor and disadvantaged students to shrunken, underfunded public
school systems. Wealthier students, for example, could afford to arrange transportation to a more
attractive school located outside their immediate vicinity. Poorer students, however, would have
to rely on public funds for transportation. If these funds were not forthcoming, these students
would see their choices effectively curtailed.
The choice movement also raises fundamental philosophical questions about the nature of the
U.S. education system. Private individuals or groups seeking to further their own individual
views run many charter schools, and contract schools are run by companies seeking to make a
profit. Should public funds advance these private interests? Or does that run counter to basic
notions of the role of public schools in a democracy?
Whether public funds should bankroll religious schools also raises fundamental constitutional
questions. The voucher programs in Milwaukee and Cleveland both channel money to religious
schools and have been challenged in court as a violation of the First Amendment to the
Constitution of the United States, which requires the separation of church and state. These cases
may eventually result in definitive rulings by the Supreme Court of the United States.
Another basic question is: Who knows best how to educate America's students? Choice
advocates believe parents are capable of making the necessary decisions. Public school
supporters, meanwhile, believe the job should be left to professional educators.
An Evolving System

Test score trends are an oft-cited statistic in the debate over education reform, and analyses of
test score trends is a hot topic among educators. Some point to tests like the NAEP to bolster
their argument that scores have remained flat for many years. Others see declines on tests such as
the California Test of Basic Skills (CTBS) and the Stanford 9 (STAR).
But test scores and other commonly cited indicators often overlook the value added by the post-
secondary education system in the United States. Colleges, community colleges, trade schools,
and universities represent America's educational strength.
In 1998 the United States spent a higher percentage of its gross domestic product (GDP, the total
value of all goods and services produced within the country) on public and private higher
education than any other country in the world. In 1995, the most recent year for which
comparative statistics are available, the United States spent $16,262 per pupil on higher
education. Japan, France, and Germany, by comparison, spent, respectively, $8,786, $6,659, and
$8,897 per pupil.
The United States spends so much money on higher education, in part, because more U.S.
students go on to higher education. In the mid-1990s about 65 percent of U.S. high school
graduates went on to college. A 1996 study by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and
Development (OECD), an international organization founded in 1961 to coordinate the economic
policies of industrialized nations, reported that 26 percent of 25- to 34-year-olds in the United
States hold degrees from four-year colleges and universities—the world's second-highest
percentage behind Korea, with 30 percent. The figure for Canada was 20 percent, the United
Kingdom 15 percent, and Germany 13 percent.
The United States has the world's highest percentage of female college graduates. Twenty-seven
percent of U.S. women aged 25 to 34 hold four-year college or university degrees, compared to
26 percent in Korea, 21 percent in Canada, 14 percent in the United Kingdom, and 12 percent in
Germany.
Many studies have emphasized that U.S. students do not work as hard in high school as their
foreign peers. But U.S. students are often confronted with a demanding academic regimen in
college. The adjustment to the academic pressures of the university can be difficult, but the end
result is that many students make up for ground lost in high school.
Nevertheless, opinion polls show that Americans remain deeply concerned about the quality of
the U.S. education system. The concept of public education is deeply ingrained in American
culture, however, and as a result, most experts believe that radical overhauls like those advocated
by the choice movement are unlikely to find popular acceptance. At the same time many experts
believe that programs which focus on the hiring of more teachers or raising test scores will not
result in dramatic improvements.
Real reform will depend on coherent programs that seek to improve teaching and that focus
attention on social issues such as poverty and parenting. Progress may come slowly, but that is
the pace of evolution. As one author put it, the history of public education reform in the United
States has been a process of “tinkering toward utopia.”
About the author: Michael W. Kirst is a professor of education at Stanford University in
Stanford, California. He is the former president of the California State Board of Education and
coauthor of The Political Dynamics of American Education.
Further reading:
A Nation at Risk. U.S. Department of Education, 1983.
Berliner, David and Biddle, Bruce. The Manufactured Crisis: Myths, Fraud, and the Attack on
America's Public Schools. Addison-Wesley, 1995.
Education at a Glance. Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD),
1996.
Elley, Warwick. How in the World Do Students Read? International Association for the
Evaluation of Educational Achievement, 1992.
Sizer, Theodore. Horace's Compromise: The Dilemma of the American High School. Houghton
Mifflin, 1984.
The Condition of Education, 1998. National Center for Education Statistics, 1998.
Tyack, David and Cuban, Larry. Tinkering Towards Utopia: A Century of Public School Reform.
Harvard University Press, 1995.
Source: Encarta Yearbook, March 1999.
Microsoft ® Encarta ® 2007. © 1993-2006 Microsoft Corporation. All rights reserved.